Bilingual Education for Indigenous Holistic Academic Resurgence and Renewal: Findings from the Indigenous-Language Immersion Study

• In Event: Indigenous Language Immersion and “Mainstream” Dual Language Bilingual Education Allyship: Learning From/With Each Other

Abstract

Objectives/Purposes
This presentation examines the distinctive pedagogical features and outcomes of Indigenous-language immersion (ILI) in relation to non-Indigenous bilingual education (BE). Native Peoples have a singular status as political-cultural sovereigns with a shared history of colonization in which compulsory English-only schooling was a prime instrument of intended identity erasure and territorial dispossession (Brayboy, 2005). A major consequence is Indigenous-language loss and enduring education disparities. Hence, the goals of contemporary Indigenous-language programs are reclaiming ancestral languages and eliminating academic inequities. Supporting the conference theme, these programs provide a model for “Just education renewal.”

Conceptual Framework
We anchor this presentation within a body of scholarship on culturally revitalizing and sustaining pedagogy (Paris & Alim, 2017) and Indigenous de/anticolonial education (Hermes & Kawai‘ae’a, 2014). We focus on two key constructs: opportunities to learn (OTL) and outcomes, locally defined. We adapt Boykin and Noguera’s (2011) OTL schema to include student engagement, support structures and teaching practices, and student and teacher assets, and expand the notion of outcomes to reflect a holistic suite of relationships between ILI schools, parents, and communities.

Methods
Drawing from a 7-year multi-university study, we ask: Under what conditions is ILI beneficial? What can be learned from ILI to improve education for Indigenous and other language-minoritized students? This is a deeply relational research process in which mutual respect and trust are paramount (Wilson, 2008). Partner Schools have histories of 20-40 years and provide 50-100% of instruction in the Indigenous language; they represent four Indigenous languages, grades pre-K—12, and public, charter, Tribal, and family-/community-run structures. Microethnographic classroom observations inscribed in fieldnotes document OTL and illuminate the processes through which locally desired outcomes are fostered. We constructed narrative profiles of each Partner School, situating programs within local contexts and larger power dynamics.

Data Sources / Data-Sharing
Data include (a) a US-wide survey of Indigenous-language programs; (b) critical ethnographic case studies of 8 linguistically, culturally, and geographically diverse ILI Partner Schools (32 site visits; 100 classroom observations; teacher log-diaries; 174 phenomenological interviews with teachers, administrators, elders, parents, and youth; and photo, video, audio, document collection); and (3) English language arts, mathematics, and IL assessments for matched students in ILI and English-medium programs. Data were analyzed through team workshops, paired coding and theming, and participant validation via ongoing data-sharing with Partner Schools.

Findings and Significance
This study provides a definitive database on Indigenous-language schooling as well as a model for research teams that include non-Indigenous allies. Data show that ILI students perform as well as or better than matched peers in English-medium programs on key outcomes. Meanwhile, students acquire their ancestral language, cultural knowledge, and a desire to “give back” to their communities. In contrast to individualistic academic achievement, we distinguish these outcomes as holistic academic wellbeing, connecting them to relational pedagogies of care, mutuality, love, and responsibility to family, community, and the natural world. This decolonial-relational paradigm illuminates the possibilities for schooling that fosters community-based academic “remedy, resurgence, and renewal” -- and sustains Indigenous ways of knowing, speaking, and being.

Authors

• Teresa L. McCarty, University of California - Los Angeles

• Tiffany S. Lee, University of New Mexico

• Sheilah E. Nicholas, University of Arizona

• Michael H. Seltzer, University of California - Los Angeles

• Kyle Halle-Erby, University of California - Los Angeles

• Thomas Jacobson, University of California - Los Angeles

• James McKenzie, University of Arizona